Search

Nobody should profit from crime; this fundamental moral principle is uncontroversial. At the level of public declaration, few people are likely to disagree with this statement; however, controversies arise when the implementation of this principle is under discussion. Numerous provisions exist that aim to strip criminals of the proceeds from their crimes, but not all aspects of this issue are immediately apparent. For example, a significant question is how to treat profits that a criminal makes from activities including recounting stories about their criminal activities, publishing books describing their actions, or creating YouTube videos presenting details about their crimes. Such profits are either treated as legitimate or are targeted by complicated legal methods of deprivation. The view presented in this paper could facilitate the ability to strip criminals from these forms of profit. This article argues that revenue accruing from knowledge gained from association with crime should be treated as indirect proceeds of crime and, as such, should be forfeited.

Nobody (except for the privileged few) can afford legal services in Namibia. In the light of this dawning awareness, how should the government and other stakeholders design the legal profession so that the greatest number of Namibians can access legal services and, ultimately, justice while preserving the profession's financial viability? The predominantly economic nature of this question means that its solutions lie less in the field of law than in the field of economics. Thus, this article adopts a methodology that reflects that insight. As a primary purpose, this article works towards solving the high cost of legal services in Namibia. It utilises a literature-review methodology that searches the scholarship on the legal profession for practical, down-to-earth solutions put forward in other countries to take the edge off the prohibitive cost of legal services. The article mainly finds that, if structured as a compulsory salary deduction, legal insurance promises the greatest positive impact on costs. And it concludes that the optimal solutions should consist of measures aimed at heightening competition in the legal profession and measures that broaden cost-sharing in providing legal assistance to the public. The article argues that competition can be effectively increased by lubricating the flow of information about prices and services, and by having more public entities bear the burden of expanding the system of legal assistance.

When considering our own death, we normally weigh its impact on the people we love and care about, as well as worrying about the way in which our life might end, hoping that not too much suffering precedes it. However, such view, despite necessary, is a passive understanding of death, interpreted as something that merely happens to us, where we would have some control over timing if physician-assisted dying were legal in our countries. But what if our relation to death would not end there? What if special medical needs, such as the emergency situation resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic, could have a direct impact on us creating a moral duty to end our lives? That is the thesis that will be advocated for in this paper: a moral duty to die will arise in some people to save resources that will help others get through Covid-19. It is important to indicate that the duty to die is personally acknowledged and self-imposed, thus nobody can be coerced to carry it out;for autonomy would be lost and such action should be considered an instance of incitement to die, therefore being morally blameworthy. © 2021 Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia. All Rights Reserved.

Governments should create IT accident investigation boards for the exact same reasons they have done so for ships, railroads, planes, and in many cases, automobiles. Denmark got its Railroad Accident Investigation Board because too many people were maimed and killed by steam trains. The UK's Air Accidents Investigation Branch was created for pretty much the same reasons, but, specifically, because when the airlines investigated themselves, nobody was any the wiser. Does that sound slightly familiar in any way?

The tradition of violence during collective bargaining processes in South Africa (particularly during a strike) can be traced back to the colonial period, where the struggle for better employment terms and conditions was conflated with the struggle for freedom from political oppression, apartheid and the colonial regime. An example in this regard is the Sharpeville uprising. In this case, the State’s reaction to the uprising was to call upon the armed forces to quell the situation, and in the process, lives and limbs were lost; nobody was held accountable for this. This was surely a bad legacy to leave for modern times! However, fifty-two years later, South Africa experienced a déja vu moment in the form of the Marikana massacre, which was also chillingly reminiscent of the massacre by apartheid police at Sharpeville in 1960. The writing of this article is informed by the need to avoid another Marikana massacre. The authors bemoan the manner in which this tragic event was handled and argue that, with the right attitude and the right application of resources, the massacre could have been avoided. The authors also lament the approach employed in dealing with the aftermath of the Marikana massacre and conclude that the status quo gives credence to the saying that “an apple does not fall far from the tree”. The prosecution of the perpetrators is delayed, no compensation is given to bereft families, and it remains to be seen who was at fault, even after a “good-for-nothing” yet costly Commission of Inquiry has completed its task.

This research eradicates the motives of innovation in the acts and deeds of Muslim Ummah. The un-islamic and unlawful additions are going to destruct the Ummah day by day. Innovation in its sense, has no more importance, but its pioneers are spreading it. All the disputes at last has roots in these innovations. Muslim ummah remained united until or unless innovations intermingled. As era went far off from the Nabwi era, the real sense of religion being vanished. As 14th century A.H. came nobody is there to prove innovations as no more part of Islam. Followers of innovation are increasing day by day and there are minority of Muslims left who want to get rid of it. Majority is serving his energy to prove that innovations are part of Islam. Secondly, they find its roots from Nabwi era which is useless. Thirdly, they wrongly proving its reward in this world and hereafter. Major objective of this research is to intimate all such acts and deeds which are wrongly now going to be the part and parcel of Shari’ah, as well as be the part of our legislation. Such kind of all deeds and actions must be condemned and discouraged for the sake of unity peace and sovereignty of the Muslim world.

This paper responds to the Radical Behavioral Challenge (RBC) to normative business ethics. According to RBC, recent research on bounded ethicality shows that it is psychologically impossible for people to follow the prescriptions of normative business ethics. Thus, said prescriptions run afoul of the principle that nobody has an obligation to do something that they cannot do. I show that the only explicit response to this challenge in the business ethics literature (due to Kim et al.) is flawed because it limits normative business ethics to condemning practitioners’ behavior without providing usable suggestions for how to do better. I argue that a more satisfying response is to, first, recognize that most obligations in business are wide-scope which, second, implies that there are multiple ways of fulfilling them. This provides a solid theoretical grounding for the increasingly popular view that we have obligations to erect institutional safeguards when bounded ethicality is likely to interfere with our ability to do what is right. I conclude with examples of such safeguards and some advice on how to use the research findings on bounded ethicality in designing ethical business organizations.

Tibor Kiraly, a determinative personality in education and research of criminal procedural law for seven decades, celebrated his 100th birthday on 11. July 2020. This long and comprehensive life is not only unique because nobody else from Hungarian criminal lawyers has lived one century, but also because Professor Kiraly has received, rightful, practically each form of professional recognitions. His work and professional attendance is multiple and diversified. He created a new school as legal scholar who helped for several generations to develop a way of thinking and a legal mentality based on humanism. A progressive thinking researcher, who has always been – beside appreciating traditions - more longsighted as his age. In his works – proceeding from scientific historical drafting – he adumbrated a picture of the future, a picture of a legal system ready for renewal. An academic, an organizer of science - who plays an important role also in forming of the community of scholars - showing the way not only for the future generation but also for fellow scholars in Hungary and abroad. A Hungarian legal scholar from the Hungarian uplands, who has done a lot in the frame of the „Bethlen Gabor Foundation” for preserving and enrichment of values of the Hungarians and simultaneously for a peaceful coexistence of the nations in Central-Europe. His life and work can be exemplary for all lawyers.

It seems inevitable from the Islamic History, when in the initial days companions started converted to Islam. Phase wisely, they would be trained for their practical life and mental grooming. This training continued for different times with various instructions. Like a doctor prescribes medicines to a patient for a period of time and then changes it, similarly Allah looked upon the capability and strength of men and sent commands accordingly. Such changes and modifications in Sharia Law are known Naskh. It is an indication that finding Naskh in hadith of the Holy Prophet is an important task. Even more important is to search and highlight Juristic Orders on that Naskh. Since there are so many disagreements among Islamic Scholars on Naskh and Mansukh. Till now, nobody has brought it to constant and proper debate. Moreover, the effects of abrogation can be found in the life of Muhammad (SAW). In the initial days, as the Holy Prophet (PBUH) forbade the Muslims from hoarding the meat of sacrifice because people could not find food for eating. Later on when the wealth increased gradually, he gave them permission for doing so. Since the knowledge of hadith has influence over such Sharia orders as well. So, this article tries to find out the essence of Naskh in hadit, its influence on Sharia law and the opinion of Islamic Scholars are analyzed in detail.

On January, 27, 2017, U.S. President Donald J. Trump issued Executive Order 13769 on immigration and travel (EO 13769), which restricted entry into the U.S. of the citizens of seven primarily Muslim countries. Many academics reacted with outrage, including me and other members of the Academy of Management (AOM), of which I was President at the time. Some scholarly associations condemned EO 13769 as immoral, but the AOM did not immediately issue such a condemnation because the AOM’s Constitution included a policy of no-political-stands (NPSP) and a principle that nobody, including the AOM President, could represent personal views as those of the organization. Within a few weeks, the AOM Constitution was changed, and in October, 2017, the AOM joined other associations in issuing a condemnation. An article was published in this journal on this situation (Tsoukas in J Bus Ethics,https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3979-y, 2018) that was subsequently amended through a published Correction (Tsoukas in J Bus Ethics,https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04194-9, 2019), but the Correction only partially addressed the problems in the original. The main contribution of this commentary is to take up the invitation in Tsoukas (2018) to examine the case for insights on theoretical and conceptual questions raised in the literature on prototypicality and moral imagination. It also briefly outlines the most significant omitted errors of fact in Tsoukas (2018) that were not corrected in Tsoukas (2019), and describes the most important methodological problems in Tsoukas (2018). The conclusion suggests that the complex, nuanced, and evolving interactions that unfolded at the AOM are not fully addressed theoretically or conceptually in this literature.

Ensuring equal liberties requires neutral, i.e. impartial, settings where nobody would be deprived of freedom because of their personal characteristics. Religion and disability appear as characteristics which may clash with the existing social and physical environments. Therefore, the necessity of adjusting the existing environment, i.e., reasonable accommodation, is mostly discussed in reference to religion and disability. I aim to discuss reasonable accommodation from a different perspective and ask whether reasonable accommodation should be extended to age issues. I propose that age can lead to differences in conscience or culture like religion. Age can also be a source of dis/ability so it can be compared to accustomed disabilities. Eventually, age may also clash with the existing social and physical environments. I further propose that age is not only similar to but also different from religion and disability when it comes to reasonable accommodation. Therefore, I defend, reasonable accommodation should be extended to age in a special way. The next question then is how age could be accommodated under the European Union (EU) law, especially when we consider that reasonable accommodation law does not have a wide scope in the EU, unlike in Canada.

A youth cannot marry his cousin because her father refuses for economic reasons. This story shows how the Saudi Arabian society connects marriage with wealth, even when it comes to relatives who are obligated culturally to take care of one another. A father is ready to sacrifice his daughter for a rich person, hoping that marriage bargain will improve his economic status. The customs of the society validate that a father can do to his daughter what he sees as good. Also, the norms of the society require a younger relative to obey an older one, even working for him; a person cannot fight back or challenge an elder. Accordingly, the relation between relatives is a relation of traditional and cultural power recognized and imposed by the society. In this story, the protagonist is colonized physically and mentally: in addition to having been exploited for fifteen years, he believes that his life is secured with his uncle. And hence, “he almost lost his personal independence,” as the story states. He can lose anything as long as his future is granted, for he believes that he is the only heir of his uncle. But after his uncle’s refusal of his proposal, he becomes aware of being marginalized and colonized. He has to struggle and search for his identity after being considered as “a nobody in the world of the living.” Like the protagonist who kills his father in the previous story, the youth of this story “deludes himself that he is brave and that he has to prove it.” Yet as an oppressed and marginalized person, the main character is neither supposed nor expected to practice oppression. But he thinks of violating his uncle’s daughter’s honor—for no fault except that she is his uncle’s daughter. In a culture that valorizes masculine values, the wretched girl becomes the victim of both her father, who wants to sell her as a commodity for the one who pays more, and of her cousin, who wants to exploit her in order to achieve his goals. Finally, in my translation, some well-known words are kept with their original pronunciation and written in italics to keep the reader aware of the Arabic text.3

In this new addition to the substantial literature on legal consciousness, Marc Hertogh seeks to chart out an alternative approach to the dominant course set by Ewick and Silbey in their seminal work The Common Place of Law and subsequently in Silbey’s article 'After Legal Consciousness.' Hertogh proposes a 'secular' approach to legal consciousness that contrasts in several important respects from what he refers to as the dominant 'critical' approach. The overall aim of this 'secular approach' is to understand 'why people—because of their strong criticism about the justice system—turn their back to law'(p. 6).

If I am not a slave, nobody else owns me and I therefore must own myself. This is but philosophical speculation and not the law. According to the legal view, not only does no one own me or my body parts, but neither do I. Legal conceptions of “property” donot extend to self-ownership. A vacuum in law concerning the ownership of body parts exists and the only responses to questions concerning this type of ownership remain philosophical and obiter dicta in reported cases. This article explores property rights in human bodies and body parts in order to establish the position in law of excised human organs removed for the use in transplantation. It is necessary to highlight the historical progression in determining property rights in human body parts, but it should be borne in mind that the majority of laws and court decisions took place in an era when organ transplants were still in an experimental phase. For the sake of brevity foreign legislation and court judgments in only two common law countries will be scrutinised and compared to the current position in South Africa. The reasons why ownership in human organs are important will also be indicated.

The longstanding dominant view is that health care practitioners should be permitted to refrain from participating in medical interventions when they have a conscientious objection to doing so in a broad range of cases. In recent years, a growing minority have been fervently advocating a sea change. In their view, medical professionals should not be permitted to refuse to participate in medical interventions merely because doing so conflicts with their own moral or religious views. One of the most commonly offered arguments in support of this position focuses on the fact that health care practitioners knew what they were getting into when they voluntarily chose to take on their professional roles; nobody forced them to do this. I will argue that, despite its popularity among opponents of conscientious refusal, this argument from voluntariness fails to provide us with a good reason to reject broad accommodationism in favour of non-accommodationism.

La ciudad de Guayaquil se convirtió en el epicentro de la pandemia en el Ecuador, el primer caso reportado oficialmente fue en la ciudad de Guayaquil el 29 de febrero del 2020 y el 11 de marzo del 2020 se declara Estado de Emergencia Sanitaria en el Sistema Nacional de Salud. El virus denominado SARS-CoV-2, responsable de la nueva enfermedad COVID-19 (Corona Virus Disease 19), llegó como un huracán, nadie se imaginó lo que pasaría en marzo y abril del 2020, la incertidumbre, la cuarentena, el bloqueo, sin estudios clínicos controlados para conocer cuál era la mejor opción de tratamiento, pero el sentido común y las experiencias de otros países que estaban pasando por la tormenta que es el COVID-19, nos ayudaron a tener una perspectiva del problema y a plantearnos objetivos a corto y mediano plazo.

In Nobody’s Law (2018), Marc Hertogh introduced the notion of legal alienation as part of a ‘secular’ approach to legal consciousness, i.e. one that does not assume law’s hegemonic power in...

Ongoing discussions about autonomous weapons typically share concerns of losing control and the potentially destabilizing consequences for global security. To the extent that there is any consensus among states, academics, NGOs and other commentators involved in diplomatic efforts under the auspices of the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, it is grounded in the idea that all weapons should be subject to meaningful human control. This intuitively appealing concept immediately gained traction, although at a familiar legal-political cost: nobody knows what the concept actually means in practice. Although global discourses on policy and governance are typically infused with ambiguity, abstract concepts are of little use if they ignore the operational context that confronts the military in their application. This article places this intuitively appealing concept in context, and thus examines it in operational practice. Paying attention to this military practice is important as it demonstrates that meaningful human control is not the only, or the best, approach through which to characterize the human role and govern the challenges raised by autonomous weapons.

Tolerance occupying an important place in our cultural and civilized life is often described as overlooking the faults, respecting different ideas and cultures, and forgiving everything that is forgivable. However, nobody should have the right to act tolerantly on behalf of tolerance under the conditions where the law of others are in the foreground. As individuals, we may behave in an altruistic manner on the matters concerning us; nevertheless, within the concept of tolerance, it is not only wrong to assess the conceding of public rights to the individuals unilaterally, but it is also assessed as an offence commited against the society. Relying on the Court Records of Kayseri this paper will examine nonMuslim Armenian citizens living in the Ottoman society and struggling for seeking their rights and their search for justice. It will also analyze how their desires for the issues causing complaints within the society are handled in the case study of Kayseri. Our objective is to bring out the concept of seeking and conceding justice concerning the problems that the people living in the Ottoman social life encounter; therefore, we aim to make a modest contribution to the settled and incorrect opinions on the matter whether at home or abroad by depending on the limits of the matter and making use of the methodology that science and scholars require within the historical framework of the concept of intercommunal tolerance and living together.

Beginning on inauguration day, President Trump has attempted an executive repeal of the Affordable Care Act. In doing so, he has tested the limits of presidential power. He has challenged the force of institutional and non-institutional constraints. And, ironically, he has helped boost public support for the ACA's central features. The first two sections of this article respectively consider the use of the President's tools to advance and to subvert health reform. The final two sections consider the forces constraining the administration's attempted executive repeal. I argue that the most important institutional constraint, thus far, is found in multifaceted actions by states – and not only blue states. I also highlight the force of public voices. Personal stories, public opinion, and 2018 election results – bolstered by presidential messaging – reflect growing support for government-grounded options and statutory coverage protections. Indeed, in a polarized time, “refine and revise” seems poised to supplant “repeal and replace” as the conservative focus countering liberal pressure for a common option grounded in Medicare.

In the last decades, we are used to hear about the democratic deficit of the European Union. In order to tackle that accusation and to foster the legitimacy of the Union, the European Institutions have tried to stimulate the Participatory Democracy and, in general, the participation of the citizens in the political life of the Union, through diverse ways. One of those means has been the European Citizens’ Initiative, that allows the citizens to take part indirectly in the formation of the European Law, but the results are poor so far. Another recourse has been the setting up of the Spitzenkandidaten process by which the citizens could influence the appointment of the President of the European Commission, a system that has been used with a relative success in the 2014 elections to the European Parliament. Nevertheless, nobody is sure whether this system will end up by being implemented once and for ever in the next elections. Other ways of increasing the Union legitimacy through citizen participation have been the attempt of setting up a single European constituency, or the creation of citizens conventions, whose efficiency will have to be evaluated in the coming years.Received: 21 December 2018Accepted: 10 January 2019Published online: 30 April 2019

The article is devoted to the President of the United States of America, Donald Trump, who made the issue of totalitarianism newsworthy for the Western world. With low ratings and doubtful reputation, the US President holds totalitarian, in fact fascist rhetoric, while our feeling of helplessness is only increasing. The history of fascism is a good map of what to look for if we do not want to allow even more radical (and especially more active) politicians to be elected, since Trump is more of a populist than a practitioner, so now the situation requires preventive measures aimed at the future. Elements of a totalitarian discourse in the public political activity of Trump appear in metaphors in which people are compared with objects (“We will put millions of our people to work”), and the country is compared with a mechanism that can be repaired only by one person (“Nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it”). Indeed, it does resemble fascism, where people are a mass and the leader is the one who forms it. However, Trump, regardless of the legitimate to some degree comparisons with Hitler or Mussolini, is neither a racist nor an anti-Semite, he is rather a politician who almost accidentally plays with these concepts, since they provide the movement and drive his political discourse. We should be aware of this fact because it is an important element of any totalitarianism. How should we resist? More intensively than ever. We need to analyze the reasons why Trump still holds a certain rating among his electoral base. Given that this rating was obtained, along with traditional channels, by means of social platforms, the struggle can and must continue there too. This perspective for fighting totalitarian tendencies may vary, but its importance remains undeniable to everyone. Article received 05.04.2018

Although offenses against international law have been proscribed at a certain level of generality, nobody hitherto has examined closely the scientific and ecological damages that would be imposed by nuclear strikes in relation to resulting possible law-of-war violations. To correct that information deficit and institutional shortfall, the first Part of this Article constructs a hortatory proposal for a tribunal for the use of nuclear weapons under international law. The second Part of the Article shows how such a tribunal statute would have a real-world effect on those charged with launching nuclear strikes and determining the legality of the strike orders. For the first time, through a series of interviews and electronic communications, we have gathered empirical and anecdotal information regarding the actual processes of launch instructions to lower level crewmembers and, in particular, those who refused the order – or “refuseniks”. What emerges from these accounts is the startling reality that low-level crewmembers had little or no guidance on the legality of the strike under the laws of war but were told simply to trust their leadership. A tribunal statute geared specifically to the use of nuclear weapons would provide needed guidance and constitute solid legal grounds upon which to stand should those lower down in the chain of command find the order to launch a nuclear strike manifestly illegal under international law.

Background: Non-smoking agreements has shown effective in preventing smoking among adolescents. However, to date, this is the first study to explore: 1) if adolescents who do or do not sign have specific characteristics, 2) adolescents’ attitudes towards signing and committing to these smoke-free agreements (SFA). Methods: This is explored by combining questionnaire and focus group data. The questionnaire data is gathered as part of the evaluation of X:IT study II; a smoking preventive intervention targeting adolescents in 7 th -9 th grade. In this paper data from second follow (8 th grade) up is used. Eight focus groups (N=43) were conducted with the adolescents in 8 th grade at two Danish secondary schools. Inspired by theory integration we draw from resistance theory to combine the results from the methods. Results: The questionnaire data showed that adolescents who were partaking in smoking or smoking-related behavior including current or ever smoked as well as have ever tried hash, snuff or electronic cigarettes to a less degree signed a SFA. Focus group analysis showed that even though the adolescents at the two schools emphasized a lack of attention to the SFA, the lack of attention was ascribed to different approaches to smoking and the SFA. In general, adolescents at one of the schools had no intention of smoking and thus willingly signed and committed. Whereas, adolescents at the other school expressed a greater resistance to signing as well as committing to the SFA. Instead, what seemed important for the adolescents at this school was a desire to act freely and appear with no strains, including possibility to smoke, which the SFA seemingly threated. Conclusion: Although non-smoking agreements, implemented in the school setting, have been effective in decreasing smoking among adolescents in other studies, our results suggest that the SFA may appeal differently to adolescents according to certain characteristics, while getting overall very little attention.

According to Donald Trump, 45th President of the United States, “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag—if they do, there must be consequences—perhaps loss of citizenship or (a) year in jail!”

There’s a $ 3 to 4 billion dollar bootleg outstanding in 0651-0031, involving three collections of information. The change of administrations offers a good time to resolve it with nobody taking the blame. In 2012, the PTO (Patent and Trademark Office) ran a 60-day notice that would have, for the first time, recognized “Amendments and Responses” as an information collection that requires approval.1 The PTO’s three long-neglected collections of information totaled over 8 million hours, times an attorney hourly rate of $340, for a total of over $ 3 billion. These estimates were included in a Supporting Statement that the PTO filed with OMB in January 2013.2 However, for reasons not explained in the record, the relevant information collections were removed from a July 2013 Supporting Statement,3 and that July Supporting Statement was approved.

If one wants to answer the question of whether and on which side the intellectuals are interested in the Reichstag election, just as in any political event whatsoever, then one must self-evidently first of all explain what one means by intellectuals. It is immediately clear that the description intellectuals cannot be a general predicate for the possession of certain mental faculties, as for example is the description the educated [Gebildete]. There are very many educated people whom nobody will describe as intellectuals, and who would also reject such a description of themselves. Many a factory-owner, trader, agriculturalist, plant boss, or wage-labourer can hold their own in their experience and keenness of mind [Scharfsinn] with many an academic, but they will not, as conscious as they might be of this fact, for that reason already deny them the name intellectuals. Conversely, it is doubtful whether academic education per se and only academic education makes an intellectual. In modern times, in industry as well as in commerce, one increasingly comes across people with an academic education, some in the uppermost positions, others—and these are the majority—as more-or-less subordinate officials [Beamte].

Knowledge is one of the most important aspects to consider when designing and implementing complex systems, such as companies, organizations, military operations, and so on. Information falling into the wrong hands can be a tragedy and can result in a huge loss of business or disastrous outcomes. To guarantee the security of communications, cryptography can be used to encode information in such way that nobody will be able to decode it without having the legal right. Many ciphers have been broken when a flaw has been found in their design or enough computing power has been applied to break an encoded message. Cryptology, as you will see later, consist of cryptography and cryptanalysis.

Nowadays probably nobody knows when and where the term “\(\sqrt{\epsilon }\) law” was coined. But as early as in 1975 in the title of one of the papers we find “\(\sqrt{\epsilon }\) revisited” Frisch and Frisch (1975).

The item was in the news. A public official said that he would hire a male rather than a female driver, because following the growing influence of the #MeToo movement, hiring a man would be safer. That way nobody would accuse him of harassment. The official’s declaration aroused justified public criticism. Being a public official, he must be committed to equality-in-hiring practices. But suppose that it were a private individual, who wanted to do his utmost to keep away from temptation. It might seem that there is nothing wrong with that: he is free to hire whomever he wishes, and his caution is justified: planning ahead and resisting temptation are marks of rationality and personhood, in Harry Frankfurt’s sense of the term. But why should one be so cautious to begin with? Challenging other philosophical analyses of temptation, I argue that temptations are hardly irresistible. We should all take responsibility for our actions and behavior. It is a moral duty to control ourselves and not let others pay the price for our shortcomings. This notion is both Kantian, as it emphasizes autonomy, and Aristotelian: it urges us to work on our virtues.

Thanks for your letter, which I’ll answer in detail later. My wife’s family in Israel are all O.K. Nevertheless, we were very worried for a while, till we heard from them, because they live in Jerusalem. Even now, things don’t look too good in the Middle East. Nobody knows when or whether there will be real peace.

In "In Whose Name?", Armin von Bogdandy and Ingo Venzke have singled out one of the most pressing challenges in current debates regarding international courts: the source of their legitimacy. Given the current structure and limits of international law, instead of expecting international courts to speak in the name of peoples and citizens, this paper contends that international courts should speak in nobody’s name and shifts the focus to judicial independence as a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for the legitimacy of international adjudication. It is argued that judicial independence cannot be understood in terms of the courts’ insularity and appropriate constraining mechanisms ought to be put in place. At first, we reflect upon the differences between domestic and international courts in framing a notion of judicial independence adequate for the international sphere. Thereafter, we flesh out the notion of judicial interdependence and map the actors that might provide appropriate constraints following a checks and balance approach to the institutional design of international courts.

During the pandemic, some universities have required as much “in person” teaching as possible everywhere on campus — including a university’s law school. Universities and their administrators who did this were wrong for three reasons. First, their fears that students would not enroll unless taught “in person” turned out to be unfounded. National postgraduate and professional school enrollment, including law school enrollment, actually increased even though almost half the country’s colleges and universities began the fall semester or quickly went primarily or entirely online. Second, these weren’t decisions about public health alone. They were also decisions about the quality of education. “In person” usually turned out to be an untested and primitive form of hybrid instruction that has no track record and has never been used on any scale before. During the pandemic the choice has never been between genuine “in person” teaching and online teaching. Public health concerns continually put some students online because of contagion risks. The real choice has been between fully online teaching (nobody in a classroom) and simultaneous hybrid teaching (some students in a classroom while others participate online). In many but not all situations, simultaneous hybrid teaching is demonstrably worse than fully online teaching. Third, university administrators who made unilateral decisions about methods of instruction violated basic rules on shared governance under the nationally authoritative 1966 AAUP Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities. The AAUP has already begun investigating some colleges and universities on this basis. And to the extent a university’s unilateral decisions included a law school, the university’s actions also violated the American Bar Association’s accreditation standards and the Association of American Law Schools’ Bylaws. A law school needs ABA accreditation for its graduates to take the bar exam, and nearly all law schools are AALS members. The ABA accreditation standards and AALS Bylaws combine to require that decisions about modality — modes of teaching — be made by a law school’s faculty, not by administrators elsewhere and imposed on the law school.

Jewish law on the “end of life” teaches that nobody is expected to suffer and that for certain individuals, death might be better than life. However, these observations need to be illustrated on the backdrop of the prohibitions of direct killing, the public interest in the preservation of life and the integrity of medicine.

The motivation for Kepler’s second law was a noticeable and decisive variation in Tycho’s data on Mars regarding calculated speed. Apparently nobody before Kepler ever inquired about the speed of the planets; instead the focus was merely on location and timing.

In social life there are always rules, norms and values that organize the behavior or patterns of society. Yet some members of society cannot fulfill the rights and responsibilities in accordance with the norms and rules. Unequal rights and obligations in social life is the reason why there are social classes in society. It means that the people who have wealth and someone who can carry out many rights and obligations will be in the upper classes and those one with little or even no rights and responsibilities will be grouped in the lower classes. This research therefore aims to explain the phenomenon of social classes in the novel Pamela, and social condition in 18th century life in England that reflected in the novel. This research used descriptive qualitative method. It was conducted by describing the data within literary work which were related to the topic of the research. The analysis of the data was done using sociology of literature approach put forward by Swingewood and Laurenson. The results of this research show that during England 18th century, social discrimination has become a major problem in the community. Social status become the standard of interaction in the society. Success and prestige of a person are measured based on his/her birth. Nobody wants to be at the bottom of the social hierarchy. The character of Pamela never think that money and power is everything. She never despise her identity as a lower class citizen who is always treated unequally in the society.

This paper presents means by which relations between facts and decisions can be put on a higher, more transparent and accountable level. The complexity of relations, their exponential effects, new technology and numerous rules have increased the public administration’s unaccountability for its actions – if it is even possible to talk about accountability at all. This kind of situation is presented as the rule of nobody that through multiple relations, competencies and division of labour diminishes the possibility to view a situation as a whole, and enhances the distinction between a person’s formal role and his inner personal world. Classical decision-making procedures (more or less still) exclude interactions between political-legal and scientific institutions on one side and between the first and social groups on the other about modern risks that go beyond classical factory-related or occupational hazards. If the presented means (performance indicators, the avoidance of exclusive subjective evidence, the use of probability in individual cases, the right to clear information, the office for legislation and regulatory analysis and an IT platform) were formally integrated into decision-making, they could enable democratisation, for which the non-stop present and available communication links are sine qua non.

Talán nincs is olyan, aki ne hallott volna a Hableány nevű sétahajó májusi szerencsétlen balesetéről. Ezzel szinte párhuzamosan – a balesetet követő nap estéjén – a belügyminiszter a Terrorelhárítási Központ (a továbbiakban: TEK) vezetőjét bízta meg, hogy irányítsa és koordinálja a mentési akciót. Nagyon összetett és a TEK számára nem szokványos feladatok elé állította a központ munkatársait a tizenhárom napig tartó mentés, figyelemmel arra, hogy az ilyen jellegű mentési műveletek nem tartoznak a TEK feladat- és hatáskörébe. De mit is jelentett mindez a gyakorlatban, tettük fel a kérdést Hajdu János rendőr vezérőrnagy úrnak, a TEK főigazgatójának, akivel dr. Hornyik Zsuzsanna beszélgetett.

There is a famous story in Chinese history. Yang Zhen, an official of the Eastern Han Dynasty, was transferred from the Prefectural Governor of Jingzhou to the Prefecture Chief of Donglai. On his way to Donglai to assume office, when he traveled to Changyi, Wang Mi, the County Governor of Changyi, who had been recommended by him when he was the Prefectural Governor of Jingzhou, heard of his arrival and visited him empty-handed during the day. However, that night, to repay him for his recommendation and help, Wang intended to make Yang a present of ten catties of gold, saying, “It’s late at night now, so no one will know.” Yang responded, “The heaven knows, the earth knows, you know, and I know. How could you say nobody knows?” Wang felt ashamed to hear that. As an official, Yang was honest and upright. In reply to the advice of his friends and elders to purchase properties for his scions, he always said, “I’ll bequeath the title ‘descendant of an incorruptible official’ to them. It’s a rich legacy, isn’t it?” This is truly the consciousness of incorruption.